It appears that you are you're enjoying our Military Surplus Collectors Forums, but haven't created an account yet. As an unregistered guest, your are unable to post and are limited to the amount of viewing time you will receive, so why not take a minute to Register for your own free account now? As a member you get free access to our forums and knowledge libraries, plus the ability to post your own messages and communicate directly with other members. So, if you'd like to join our community, please CLICK HERE to Register !
Already a member? Login at the top right corner of this page to stop seeing this message.
I read a week ago on one of these threads (can't find it now), that a Garand Publication has stated that any commercial ammo with 150 t0 180 grain bullets is safe to fire in an M1. Does anyone have documentation of this? Apologies to whoever posted this but I really want to believe this. In the 1970s and 80s I fired all kinds of ammo through my Garand with no adverse effects but since the warning came out about commercial ammo I find the "M1 appropriate" ammo quite expensive.
BEAR
Information
Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.
I believe that I am the one that mentioned that. It was the Winter 2019 issue of the Garand Collectors Association Journal (Volume 34, Issue 1) that had the article. It was entitled "M2 Ball Facts vs. Myth: Another Point of View" from page 23-26.
Now, I could scan and post those pages, but since the GCA Journal is a paid publication, I do not feel comfortable doing so without the consent of someone representing the publication like Bob Seijas (who is a member here.)
Now, that said, one of the points of data they use was posted by this gentleman:
who actually measured op-rod velocity using various lots of commercial and M2 ball ammunition.
Look at the data and draw your own conclusions. However, my interpretation is that if you have varieties of M2 ball which result in higher op-rod velocity than most commercial ammunition, the use of most commercial ammunition is fine. I would avoid anything with a particularly heavy (200+ grain bullet) or very high muzzle velocity (3000+ fps), although this is more because I don't like punishing my shoulder, the gun would likely endure it just fine.
Anyone who has questions about the metallurgy of the M1 should get a hold of a copy of Hatcher's Book of the Garand which describes some of the testing done on the rifle at Springfield armory. One particular incident I recall reading was when John Garand put a 120,000 PSI proof load in the rifle, the case head melted and the bolt got stuck, but held in the receiver and the barrel and the rifle was again put into working condition.
Thank you Hcompton79 for this video and I would not expect you to copy any publication that was for members only. I was just curious about your statement. Thanks again.
Well, the original Don Kemps survey of available Garand ammo ignited some vehement disagreement! I invited the most vocal critics John Winn and Jeremy Cheek to write something in response, which they did. Now THAT has generated disagreement in other quarters and a Part 3 is slated for the next Journal. One of the authors is Gus Fisher, one of GCA's Technical Advisors and a most authoritative source. It turns out to be a highly controversial subject! Stay tuned. But always feel free to quote anything from the GCA Journal, just give a simple credit.
Thank you HCompton79. A nice review and a large amount of data for everyone. As Bob said, tremendous controversy. We are trying to coax more life out of our 60-85 year old rifles. JCG never planned to them to have this longevity. The military only planned to use them for a short period and parts were disposable and made to be replaced if worn out. If they were so valuable and precious we would have kept every original one and never produced any more. How many machine gun barrels have been replaced, just because an Army, Air Force, Navy or Marine held their finger longer than they were supposed to? Will the M1 wear out? Well sure it will but not probably in the amount that we will shoot them any more. HXP being hot is no secret. If you fire 5,000 rounds per year you may wear out an op rod with ammo that is within a 10,000 psi muzzle pressure. The metal is old, the wood is most likely old and most of us are "old", parts are going to be replaced. Finding them may be an issue. You have been warned, 150-180 grain bullet, 47-52 grains of powder that gives a velocity of ~2,800 fps is the sweet spot. One other thing is that in 20 years of cruising the Internet, I have never seen one photo of a "Bent" op rod. I've seen rifles blow up, blown up, bolts cracked, stocks cracked, loose gas cylinders, worn gas pistons and bad poppet valves. I'm sure they exist, and that is one crazy piece of metal that kept the M1 the longest serving service rifle until the "Black Rifle" passed it by with many years to go. I usually regret these replies due to the heat I will get. I love my M1, it is a piece of American history and gave us an edge in WW2 and Korea. It was however a tool and if overused or misused it may break. It is fun to compete with it, and even today it would hold its own. But if the Marines on Guadalcanal had M1's and the army had M16's, you know what they would have done.
PPU Garand ammunition has seemed reasonably priced to me. Lower than most other commercial brands by quite a bit. I bought quite a bit of it over the past few years. Gun shows they sell it in white boxes. Blue boxes are usually on store shelves.
PPU Garand ammunition has seemed reasonably priced to me. Lower than most other commercial brands by quite a bit. I bought quite a bit of it over the past few years. Gun shows they sell it in white boxes. Blue boxes are usually on store shelves.
Not commonly known but PPU make 2 loads with 150 grn bullets in 30-06, if you follow the link and scroll down a bit on the right hand side two loads are listed with the second load having a lower MV, according to Prvi that is the M1 Garand load. However the other hotter stuff works well and costs less! https://www.prvipartizan.com/download/PPU_2018.pdf
It's fascinating that we're here discussing openly what civilian ammo to use for the M1 while normally these threads disintegrate into a bunfight over "Can't use anything but M2"... I have to agree though that before the advent (or invent) of the internet we shot what came to hand. That meant anything 30-06 in nature and never, I mean not even once have I ever heard of anything untoward happening. I didn't even hear of anyone who knew someone...that had something happen.
Now of course, all we hear is about a catastrophic failure imminent... Except for right now where we're sharing info.
. Does anyone have documentation of this? Apologies to whoever posted this but I really want to believe this. In the 1970s and 80s I fired all kinds of ammo through my Garand with no adverse effects but since the warning came out about commercial ammo I find the "M1 appropriate" ammo quite expensive.
PM
Originally Posted by Aragorn243
